header-logo header-logo

29 January 2014
Issue: 7592 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Boris in bus-ad ban storm

Questions over Mayor’s link to TfL’s ban of controversial bus advert

The Court of Appeal has ordered the High Court to investigate whether the Mayor of London intervened to pull controversial gay-“cure” bus adverts.

The proposed adverts, by Christian charity The Core Issues Trust read “Not Gay! Ex-Gay, Post-Gay and Proud, Get Over It”, and were intended as a response to the Stonewall bus adverts, “Some people are gay. Get over it!”

The charity, which supports those who want to “cure” their homosexuality, accused Mayor Boris Johnson of intervening in the decision for political reasons, which would make the decision unlawful. Johnson was due to speak at a hustings organised by gay rights group Stonewall on the day the adverts were blocked. The High Court upheld the ban.

However, Lord Dyson, in the Court of Appeal, pointed to new evidence of an e-mail which “unequivocally” states the Mayor had “instructed” Transport for London (TfL) to ban the advert, and shows the Mayor’s aides immediately contacted The Guardian newspaper. TfL said it had taken the decision to ban the adverts, regardless.

Lord Dyson, giving his decision in R (Core Issues Trust) v TfL [2014] EWCA Civ 34, said: “This is a very unsatisfactory state of affairs.”

However, he said TfL were entitled to ban the adverts. “The restrictions are justified in view of the prominence of the advertisements and the fact that they would be seen by, and cause offence to, large numbers of the public in central London,” he said.

“Moreover, for those who are gay, the advertisements would be liable to interfere with the right to respect for their private life under Art 8(1).”

He said that to allow the adverts would “involve a breach of [TfL’s] duty to have due regard to the s 149(1) [of the Equality Act] considerations and encourage homophobia and put homosexuals at risk”.

 

Issue: 7592 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

42BR Barristers—4 Brick Court

42BR Barristers—4 Brick Court

42BR Barristers to be joined by leading family law set, 4 Brick Court, this summer

Winckworth Sherwood—Rubianka Winspear

Winckworth Sherwood—Rubianka Winspear

Real estate and construction energy offering boosted by partner hire

Gateley Legal—Daniel Walsh

Gateley Legal—Daniel Walsh

Firm bolsters real estate team with partner hire in Birmingham

NEWS
A wave of housing and procedural reforms is set to test the limits of tribunal capacity. In his latest Civil Way column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold charts sweeping change as the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 begins biting
Plans to reduce jury trials risk missing the real problem in the criminal justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, David Wolchover of Ridgeway Chambers argues the crown court backlog is fuelled not by juries but weak cases slipping through a flawed ‘50%’ prosecution test
Emerging technologies may soon transform how courts determine truth in deeply personal disputes. In this week's NLJ, Madhavi Kabra of 1 Hare Court and Harry Lambert of Outer Temple Chambers explore how neurotechnology could reshape family law
A controversial protest case has reignited debate over the limits of free expression. In NLJ this week, Nicholas Dobson examines a Quran-burning incident testing public order law
The courts have drawn a firm line under attempts to extend arbitration appeals. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed of the University of Leicester highlights that if the High Court refuses permission under s 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996, that is the end
back-to-top-scroll